The Demonization of Woman in Femi Osofisan’s Women of Owu Ndubuisi Nnanna Department of Theatre and Film Studies University of Nigeria Nsukka 08038684409 Abstract Critical opinions on Femi Osofisan‟s Women of Owu are largely stereotypical. They lament the plunder of Owu and compare it to that of Troy, drawing some parallels between Euripides‟ The Trojan Women and Osofisan‟s adaptation of it. There is a clear effort to assume some kind of historical and cultural affinity between the women of ancient Owu and Troy. But most of these assumptions are apparently contrived. It seems that there has been no attempt to consider Osofisan‟s play in its own right. This study is an endeavor in that direction. It adopts the Reader-Response approach as a framework to conduct a phenomenological analysis of Osofisan‟s Women of Owu to discover the extent to which it truly reflects the true picture of the Owu war in the 17th century and portrays the cultural identity of the women of Owu. It also compares Euripides‟ parent play with Osofisan‟s version in the context of their individual historical backgrounds to determine how each play captures the realities of their specific cultural milieu. Its conclusion is that in an attempt to find parallels to fit into the mould of his source play, Osofisan has inadvertently extrapolated the cultural essence of a society that had little regard for women into the cultural history of an African community, where women had a lot of respect, and in the process has demonized womanhood and given impetus to some flawed assumptions and misinterpretations of history. Femi Osofisan‟s Women of Owu is a sordid tale of unimaginable grief. It is a story of extreme plunder, pillage, and dehumanization, especially, of womanhood. Little wonder that its blurb is replete with dolorous reviews that evoke the most intense image of suffering and ravishment. The play is Femi Osofisan‟s retelling of Euripides‟ classic The Trojan Women in an African (Yoruba) garb. But beneath the surface of this gory narrative that so evidently bemoans the fate of some helpless women is a cultural aberration that inadvertently casts African womanhood in a strange mold that could be regarded as demonizing. This paper adopts the Reader-Response approach in a Phenomenological framework to interrogate the consequence of Osofisan‟s adaptation of Euripides on the cultural credibility of the Yoruba women he has adopted for his artistic modeling. The first task here is to examine the structure of textual relationship between Euripides‟ play and Osofisan‟s adaptation of it, for the purpose of determining if there is mutual enhancement between them or if one text is privileged over the other. The second is to situate both plays within their respective cultural matrices to appraise the extent to which they, individually, reflect the realities of gender value and expectations within those cultures. With over fifty plays to his credit Femi Osofisan is, undoubtedly, one of Nigeria‟s, nay, Africa‟s most prolific playwrights. He is usually categorized among the second generation of Nigerian playwrights, after the likes of Wole Soyinka and J.P. Clark-Bekederemo who are usually considered the forerunners of Nigerian drama. However, Osofisan is equally a trailblazer in his own right for, as Olu Obafemi rightly says in The Continuum Companion to Twentieth Century Theatre, he is “… a pioneer of the drama of conscious ideological commitment. His plays deal with topical political issues from a philosophically materialistic perspective” (575). He is usually interested in narratives that capture the peculiar experiences of intersecting social processes, shifting locations and identities. According to Emeka Nwabueze; Osofisan has consistently attempted to arouse revolutionary consciousness in his readers and audience. His works combine effectively his astonishing expression of anger, frustration, and outrage against Nigeria‟s socio-political milieu, his penchant for avant-garde dramatic structure, his love of symbolic dialogue and his pre-occupation with political consciousness, mass mobilization and revolution (141). The themes of these plays usually revolve around deprivation, subordination, exclusion, and marginalization within cultural spaces, and organized social relations. Femi Osofisan has remained an activist of sorts, seeking for an end to injustice and class tyranny in Nigeria. As Muyiwa Awodiya affirms, “… the thematic preoccupation of his works remains the same: a vision of a better society that is free from the shackles of oppression, injustice and corruption” (102). It is, therefore, not surprising that Femi Osofisan would be interested in the story of Owu and the women who were the victims of indescribable injustice and extreme internecine plunder. Commissioned by the Chipping Norton Theatre, UK in 2004 and published by the University Press Ibadan in 2006, Women of Owu is a testimony of the depth of Femi Osofisan‟s creative versatility. The play is a continuation of his interest in the adaptation of European classics. In 1999 he had successfully adapted Sophocles‟ Antigone into what he titled Tegonni, An African Antigone. And in 2010 he continued with the publication of a rereading of Shakespeare‟s The Merchant of Venice. The resulting play, Love’s Unlike Lading: A Comedy from Shakespeare was commissioned by The Rainbow Book Club in Port Harcourt, Nigeria. The 2004 premiere English tour of Women of Owu was very successful. The play was well received and attracted so many positive reviews. Most of these, as already mentioned, are on the blurb of the published play. They capture the grief and empathy that Osofisan‟s Women of Owu evoke whether on stage or on the page and the very powerful language and lasting images contained in every scene of the play, which are, to say the least, heartrending. Olakunbi Olasope rightly observes the paucity of scholarly opinions on the play. But the few that exist, as well as his own, follow the same trend as the production reviews. In his article “To Sack a City or to Breach a Woman‟s Chastity: Euripides‟ Trojan Women and Osofisan‟s Women of Owu”, Olasope is of the opinion that the play is “… a play about the sufferings encountered by women during and after war… Owu is looted, desolate and in ruins; psychologically, culturally, politically and economically” (112-3). According to Felix Budelmann too, The play is set outside the burning city, not of Troy, but of Owu in Yorubaland, part of what is now Nigeria. It tells about the sufferings imposed by war. Its main mode is empathy and pity for the victims of war, especially the women. Owu is in ruins, and its former inhabitants are constantly threatened by rape, displacement, slavery, degradation, and death (15). There can hardly be any encounter with the play that would produce a contrary opinion. But in my view such opinions are more automatic than critical. To arrive at a more critical appreciation of the play, this study will suspend already formed knowledge of the text and author. The Reader-Response and Phenomenological critical frameworks offer the appropriate platforms for this intention. The Reader-Response critical approach allows a reader to complement the writing process through direct impressions formed from a mental engagement with a text. One of the major proponents of the reader- response criticism, Wolfgang Iser, provides a definition of the approach in the preface to his book Prospecting: From Reader-Response to Literary Anthropology (1989); “What has come to be called reader-response criticism provides a framework for understanding text processing, revealing the way in which the reader‟s faculties are both acted upon and activated. By putting the response-inviting structures of a literary text under scrutiny, a theory of aesthetic response provides guidelines for elucidating the interaction between text and reader” (vii). M.H.Abrams and Geoffrey Harpham, too, in A Glossary of Literary Terms (2005), offer a comprehensive insight into the guiding principles of this approach; Reader-Response critics turn from the traditional conception of a work as an achieved structure of meanings to the ongoing mental operations and responses of readers as their eyes follow a text on the page before them. In more drastic forms of such criticism, matters that had been considered by critics to be features of the work itself are dissolved into an evolving process, consisting primarily of diverse expectations, and the violations, deferments, satisfactions, and restructurings of expectations, in the flow of a reader‟s experience. Reader-response critics of all theoretical persuasions agree that, at least to some considerable degree, the meanings of a text are the “production” or “creation” of the individual reader, hence that there is no one “correct” meaning for all readers either of the linguistic parts or of the artistic whole of a text (265-6). To Reader-Response critics, the effects of a literary work “… psychological and otherwise, are essential to any accurate description of its meaning, since that meaning has no effective existence outside of its realization in the mind of a reader” (Tompkins ix). The implication of the above assertions is that the meaning of a text cannot be divorced from its effect upon the mind of a reader and consequently should not be dependent on any extraneous assumptions that are not connected with the direct interaction between the mind of the reader and the text. Marvin Carlson affirms the significance of this mind-text engagement by pointing out albeit unwittingly, the creative role of the reader in the interpretative process (292). The Reader is thus by implication privileged over the text. Gerry Brenner calls attention to this privileging by pointing out that; One virtue of reader-response criticism has been its allowance- some would say indulgence- of every reader‟s interaction with the text he or she reads.